[liking strange questions]
> Hey, the following thought occurred to me. Is it legal to use a
> uriref in an RDF triple, where the uriref is the URL of the document
> in which the triple appears? In other words, can a piece of RDF refer
> to itself? If so, what could it possibly mean?
I just tried such a case
==== etc001.n3
[] etc:supportsProofOf
[ etc:blunt <test001.nt>,
<test002.nt>,
<test003.nt>,
<etc001.n3>; # self-reference
etc:kind <rdf-rules.n3>,
<rdfs-rules.n3>;
etc:sharp <test004.nt> ] .
====
and that works fine and could actually (maybe) be useful
in case etc001 contains additional facts to support the
entailment test case (which is not the case here)
no?
it seems to be very similar to the thing/ectension distinction
isn't it?
> In case anyone is wondering, the issue arises when one starts playing
> with Jos deRoo's entailment examples, which have triples which talk
> about RDF documents.
--
Jos